Skip to comments.
Space travel at warp speed?
Seattle Times ^
| June 4, 05
| John Johnson Jr
Posted on 06/27/2005 4:44:21 PM PDT by Arkie2
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-99 next last
1
posted on
06/27/2005 4:44:21 PM PDT
by
Arkie2
To: Arkie2
This sounds like a real blast to ride. One boom and your gone for good.
2
posted on
06/27/2005 4:46:28 PM PDT
by
handy old one
(It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims. Aristotle)
To: Arkie2
3
posted on
06/27/2005 4:48:30 PM PDT
by
Textide
To: handy old one
The acceleration from these engines is very slow. It's been likened to the pressure of a piece of paper held in your hand. There's nothing neck snapping about getting up to speed but the engine has the ability to accelerate for weeks at a time.
4
posted on
06/27/2005 4:48:35 PM PDT
by
Arkie2
(No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
To: Arkie2
Hopefully they've been working on the brakes.
5
posted on
06/27/2005 4:49:15 PM PDT
by
SamAdams76
(Old enough to know better, still too young to care)
To: handy old one
"This sounds like a real blast to ride. One boom and your gone for good." Nuclear reactors don't "go boom". The worst that could happen is a loss of coolant, and the reactor melting, which, in outer space, does zip harm, except that the spacecraft payload is not delivered.
To: Arkie2
7
posted on
06/27/2005 4:50:32 PM PDT
by
My2Cents
("In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell)
To: SamAdams76
Just turn it around and thrust in the opposite direction. There's no need for sudden stops in space!
8
posted on
06/27/2005 4:50:45 PM PDT
by
Arkie2
(No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
To: Arkie2
The craft would be powered by an onboard nuclear reactor.Well, you just killed it right there. Wait till the anti-nuke kooks hear about this one....
9
posted on
06/27/2005 4:52:21 PM PDT
by
dirtbiker
(Solution for Terrorism: Nuke 'em 'till they glow, then shoot 'em in the dark!)
To: Arkie2
This could help us get to the outter planets faster than we can now. As the previous poster said, it's a very gentle acceleration, a few grams of force. But the force keeps on gradually accelerating the craft for months and then years. Eventually, we could get it going at a pretty impressive velocity.
With technology like this, we might...*might*... in the intermediate future be able to get an unmanned probe to our nearest neighbor star within one human's lifetime.
It's been a while since I did my calculations but, with our existing chemical rockets, to get an object.. any object.. to proxima centauri (literally on our doorstep, in cosmic terms) would take around 900 years.
Unless we can travel faster than light, all but a tiny speck of our own galaxy will remain forever off limits, unfortunately.
10
posted on
06/27/2005 4:53:38 PM PDT
by
Bones75
To: My2Cents
Can we launch HerAnkles to Zeta Reticuli?
She could take things from the ETs for for the common good.
11
posted on
06/27/2005 4:53:59 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: My2Cents
HerAnkles?GOD, NO! Please tell me hillery is NOT involved with this......PLEASE!
12
posted on
06/27/2005 4:54:24 PM PDT
by
dirtbiker
(Solution for Terrorism: Nuke 'em 'till they glow, then shoot 'em in the dark!)
To: KevinDavis
13
posted on
06/27/2005 4:54:29 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: dirtbiker
They're already working to kill it but we've used nuke reactors in space before. Most recently I think Sheila Jackson Lee called for an investigation into the dangers. Naturally, she's an expert.
14
posted on
06/27/2005 4:54:38 PM PDT
by
Arkie2
(No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
To: Arkie2
15
posted on
06/27/2005 4:54:45 PM PDT
by
My2Cents
("In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell)
To: Arkie2
Dubbed "Herakles," the system would use an ion beam produced from xenon gas to propel the craft to speeds of 200,000 mph, 10 times faster than the top speed of the space shuttle. Because the new technology is much more efficient than conventional propulsion systems, the craft will be able to carry heavier, more-sophisticated scientific equipment. Well now...that 200,000 mph sure sounds sweet...until you realize that it's 1/3348th of the speed of light!
Personally, I prefer the speed of Dark!
16
posted on
06/27/2005 4:56:32 PM PDT
by
Itzlzha
("The avalanche has already started...it is too late for the pebbles to vote")
To: Bones75
The other huge advantage of the combination of an ion drive and nuclear power is a huge increase (20 times as much) in power to run onboard systems. We're looking at a quantum leap in exploration with more powerful mapping radars, communications etc. This really is the engine of the future in space.
17
posted on
06/27/2005 4:57:34 PM PDT
by
Arkie2
(No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
To: Bones75
How long would it take to get to PC with this ion system?
18
posted on
06/27/2005 4:58:29 PM PDT
by
Rennes Templar
("The future ain't what it used to be".........Yogi Berra)
To: Arkie2
I'm assuming that using the gravitational pull of planets would still be usefull for building speed more quickly.
19
posted on
06/27/2005 4:59:39 PM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(I zot trolls for fun and profit.)
To: Arkie2
20
posted on
06/27/2005 5:00:39 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-99 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
